Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.42% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-4748High confidence
pf silently ignores certain rules
FreeBSD · FreeBSD
7.5HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Mitigation availableHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Apply the linked authoritative mitigation while planning the permanent fix.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs FreeBSD FreeBSD and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Mitigation available01
What, why and how
A regression in the way hashes were calculated caused rules containing the address range syntax (x.x.x.x - y.y.y.y) that only differ in the address range(s) involved to be silently dropped as duplicates. Only the first of such rules is actually loaded into pf. Ranges expressed using the address[/mask-bits] syntax were not affected. Some keywords representing actions taken on a packet-matching rule, such as 'log', 'return tll', or 'dnpipe', may suffer from the same issue. It is unlikely that users have such configurations, as these rules would always be redundant. Affected rules are silently ignored, which can lead to unexpected behaviour including over- and underblocking.
What
A regression in the way hashes were calculated caused rules containing the address range syntax (x.x.x.x - y.y.y.y) that only differ in the address range(s) involved to be silently dropped as duplicates. Only the first of such rules is actually loaded into pf. Ranges expressed using the address[/mask-bits] syntax were not affected. Some keywords representing actions taken on a packet-matching rule, such as 'log', 'return tll', or 'dnpipe', may suffer from the same issue. It is unlikely that users have such configurations, as these rules would always be redundant. Affected rules are silently ignored, which can lead to unexpected behaviour including over- and underblocking.
Why
The product accidentally uses the wrong operator, which changes the logic in security-relevant ways.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
A regression in the way hashes were calculated caused rules containing the address range syntax (x.x.x.x - y.y.y.y) that only differ in the address range(s) involved to be silently dropped as duplicates. Only the first of such rules is actually loaded into pf. Ranges expressed using the address[/mask-bits] syntax were not affected. Some keywords representing actions taken on a packet-matching rule, such as 'log', 'return tll', or 'dnpipe', may suffer from the same issue. It is unlikely that users have such configurations, as these rules would always be redundant. Affected rules are silently ignored, which can lead to unexpected behaviour including over- and underblocking.
Why
The product accidentally uses the wrong operator, which changes the logic in security-relevant ways.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Use of Incorrect Operator → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-480 ↗
CWE-480: Use of Incorrect Operator. The product accidentally uses the wrong operator, which changes the logic in security-relevant ways.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Mitigation available
- Action
- The Cyber Centre encourages users and administrators to review the provided web links and apply the necessary updates.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 1 Apr 2026 · Last source change 1 Apr 2026, 14:56 UTC · CWE-480 · Use of Incorrect Operator
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCISA ADP
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-17818
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Mitigation available.Canadian Centre for Cyber Security ↗
- Before
- Awaiting fix
- After
- Mitigation available
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.